Reason Magazine

reason.org

reason.com

reason.tv

donate

previous link

REASON.TV VIDEO:The
Big Scrum: How Teddy Roosevelt Saved Football - Q&A with… (6.9)

REASON.TV VIDEO:3
Reasons Not to Fund Art with Taxes (& Yes, There's a Weiner… (6.8)

REASON.TV VIDEO:How
Cultural Innovation Happens: Q&A with Anthropologist Grant… (6.7)

REASON.TV VIDEO:Jefferson
Memorial Dance Dance Revolution - 6/4/2011 (6.4)

REASON.TV VIDEO:Veronique
de Rugy: The Facts about the Government's Medicare… (6.3)

REASON.TV VIDEO:Universidad
Francisco Marroquin (aka University of Free… (6.2)

REASON.TV VIDEO:MSNBC vs Sarah
Palin vs The Flag vs Sanctimonious BS (6.1)

REASON.TV VIDEO:Bitcoin
& The End of State-Controlled Money: Q&A with Jerry… (6.1)

REASON.TV VIDEO:North
Carolina Bans Rare Burgers! Nanny of the Month (May 2011) (5.31)

REASON.TV VIDEO:Veronique
de Rugy Tells the Truth about Taxes & Entitlements (5.27)

next link

✕

Loading...

more sharing

StumbleUpon

Digg

Reddit

close video

Subscribe

Print

E-Reader

Android
App

iPhone App

Reason E-Mail
Lists

Reason
Stuff

Subscriber
Services

Share

Reason on
Facebook

Reason on Twitter

Reason on Youtube

Reason
RSS

About

About

Contact

Privacy

Reason Foundation

Staff

Staff

Contributors

Archives

Archives

Print Issues

Cover Gallery

Hit & Run Blog

Brickbats

Topics

Poll

Feeds

Podcasts

RSS

Events

Advertise

Donate

Print|Email

Do
More Cops Equal Less Crime?

Or do the stats disprove the rhetoric?

Steve Chapman | November 12, 2007

The Democratic theme song is "Happy Days Are Here
Again," and nowhere do Democrats think that axiom applies better than in the
realm of fighting crime. They recall that thanks to legislation passed in 1994,
Bill Clinton put 100,000 new cops
on the street, and the result was an abatement of violence. Give Democrats their
way, they suggest, and we can repeat that success.

Leading the charge is Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., who sponsored that bill and is
pushing legislation to hire another 50,000 officers, at a cost of $3.6 billion
over six years, under the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program.
He says it was because of
the last round of hiring that "murder and violent crime rates went down eight
years in a row."

It's hard to find Democrats who differ. Among his co-sponsors are fellow
presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and Christopher Dodd. The
House has already passed a similar measure.

But anyone who expects this approach to work as promised should take a closer
look at what actually happened the last time. In the first place, the 1994 bill
didn't make good on its goal of adding 100,000 cops to the streets. A study
commissioned by the National Institute of Justice estimated it produced a net
increase of just 82,000, while allowing that it might have been as few as
69,000.

Those numbers aside, the retreat of lawlessness began before any of those new
police were sworn in. The murder rate peaked in 1991, and property crime began a
steady decline in the mid-1970s. Biden blames the demise of federal hiring
grants two years ago for the rise in violent crime in 2005 and 2006. But the
murder rate has been essentially stable since 1999, with only minor year-to-year
variations. The overall crime rate, meanwhile, continued to fall over the last
two years.

Some criminologists find no evidence that the new cops did anything to lower
the level of mayhem. A study by John Worrall and Tomislav Kovandzic of the
University of Texas at Dallas, published this year in the journal Criminology,
concluded that "COPS grants had no discernible effect on serious crime." A 2005
report by the Government Accountability Office disagreed, but said the effect
was very small. About 95 percent of the decline in crime in the 1990s, it said,
was attributable to other factors.

We shouldn't be surprised that adding all those patrol officers would produce
little or no improvement. Given the multiple shifts, vacation and sick days, the
additional number of personnel on the street at any given moment is only about
10,000, spread across a nation of 300 million people. That's fewer than one
extra cop per local police department.

Flooding the zone in high-crime areas might yield significant results. But
the money also wasn't targeted at those cities with the worst crime. It was
allocated, with majestic impartiality, among places that are dangerous and
places that are safe.

As Worrall and Kovandzic note, the average COPS hiring grant was practically
a rounding error, amounting to about one half of one percent of a typical
department's annual budget. Expecting that amount of money to have a dramatic
effect on crime is like losing a pound and thinking you'll need to have all your
pants taken in.

"If you doubled the size of the police force," Worrall told me, "you'd expect
crime to decline. But at this level, it's not enough to make a noticeable
difference."

The sponsors suggest the Bush administration has abdicated its crime-fighting
duties by not providing funds for additional hiring. What they conveniently
forget is that the program was supposed to be a temporary boost rather than a
permanent obligation. Local law enforcement has historically been the
responsibility of cities and counties, not the federal government.

If more cops really translate into safer streets, you would think local
taxpayers would be more than willing to bear the expense. But if they don't
think their safety is worth what it costs, why should the rest of us foot the
bill? The idea that residents of one city can finance their police operations at
someone else's expense is a fraud. Everyone gets federal money from the COPS
program, but everyone also pays for it.

In the case of a new version of the program, what we'd have to pay is clear.
What we'd get back is not.

COPYRIGHT 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

Reason needs your support. Please donate today!

Tweet

more sharing

StumbleUpon

Digg

Reddit

Try
Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are
not completely satisfied.

See
all 76 comments | Leave
a comment

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be
civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for
comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not
represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to
delete any comment for any reason at any time.

M|11.12.07 @
7:07AM|#

"If you doubled the size of the police force," Worrall told me, "you'd
expect crime to decline. But at this level, it's not enough to make a
noticeable difference."

Depends how you define crime.

reply to this

Guy Montag|11.12.07 @
7:19AM|#

Depends how you define crime.

It also depends heavily on what
number you began with, plus lots of other things, like where they are
concentrated, what they are working on (to your point), etc.

If you
"double" a shift of 5 to 10 and all they are doing is enforcing HOV restrictions
one can generate a bunch of lame, but positive, numbers.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 7:23AM|#

Maybe they need to pay for all those 'MADD' road blocks.

reply to this

M|11.12.07 @
7:33AM|#

I was thinking particularly of under-reported copogenic crime.

reply to this

Guy Montag|11.12.07 @
7:39AM|#

Yea, M, I was thinking that too.

reply to this

M|11.12.07 @
7:44AM|#

Guy - Ah. Well, your comment recalled also how many statutes prohibiting
"civilians'" innocuous, benign, or laudatory conduct it is cops' sworn to
enforce.

reply to this

Guy Montag|11.12.07 @
7:57AM|#

Something similar came up when I met Christopher Hitchens. We both were in
agreement that a lot of people and leaders were not taking the GWOT seriously. I
added that the Left seems to think that GWOT means we need a lot more union cops
and fire fighters, just an excuse to help out their union buddies and suppliers.
I d not recall, but I MUST have mentioned the old stand-by "if we need so many
more cops why do I keep getting speeding tickets"?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 8:23AM|#

"We both were in agreement that a lot of people and leaders were not taking
the GWOT seriously. "

This is off-topic, and might even be considered a
threadjack attempt, but here goes: When is Reason going to do an article on all
of the good progress in Iraq? The surge is working. The mood has shifted from
despair to hope over here.

I can understand opposing US involvement over
here, but Reason ought to at least take a look at the accumulating good news if
only to sneer that it is all just an illusion built on lies.

reply to this

Guy Montag|11.12.07 @
8:31AM|#

wayne,

No group of people can be without flaw, unless it is the group
I let hang around me :)

Truth is, Reason would be reporting the
'quagmire' in North Aftica or Normandy in exactly the same way they are
reporting the GWOT. Don't even get me started on the Battle of the Bulge. For a
glimpse into how a war movie would have been chosen and written by the Reason
staff, see "A Bridge Too Far".

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:05AM|#

We need more cops to administer breathalyzer tests to high school kids at
school functions. We need more cops to wander around in busy intersections
peeking through the windshields of cars to see if the occupants are buckled up.
We need more cops to cruise around on trash day to see if people are complying
with recycling rules. We need more cops to escort (at high speed) and defend
"high value government assets."

et c, et c......

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:19AM|#

Truth is, Reason would be reporting the 'quagmire' in North Aftica or
Normandy in exactly the same way they are reporting the GWOT. Don't even get me
started on the Battle of the Bulge.

Maybe your opponents would take
your positions more seriously of you chilled out on the bad World Ward II
analogies?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:21AM|#

And btw, the right pretty much uses the "GWOT" as an excuse to build more
big-ticket cold war era military toys to help out their military contractor
buddies.

reply to this

ed|11.12.07 @ 9:27AM|#

When is Reason going to do an article on all of the good progress in
Iraq?

I'm pretty sure the answer to that question is "never." It's a
truism in journalism that good news is never as interesting as bad. Most of the
stories here slant toward the negative, the result being that libertarianism is
perceived by outsiders as a pessimistic, sarcastic political movement.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:32AM|#

Most of the stories here slant toward the negative, the result being that
libertarianism is perceived by outsiders as a pessimistic, sarcastic political
movement.

I wasn't born pessimistic or sarcastic, the government
made that way...

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:33AM|#

Ah, whining about "the good news from Iraq."

It's like 2003, 2004,
2005, and 2006 all over again.

reply to this

joe|11.12.07 @
9:35AM|#

The surge is working.

There was a political deal among Sunni
and Shiite parties, ending the insurgency and passing an oil deal?

You'd
think we would have seen something in the news about that.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:36AM|#

Never underestimate the ability of die-hard war supporters to move the goal
post.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:43AM|#

I became a policeman in 1994 in on of the cities which received the COPS
money. I have a few observations:

1. The COPS grant only provided us with
an addition 4 policemen -- and the city responded by hiring 4 less policemen
that year from its own coffers.

2. COPS/ DWI Road Blocks, DARE, these are
all PC bulls**t programs. We don't like them and know they don't reduce crime,
but whenever the federal cash cow decides to give some milk, every city says its
hungry.

3. "community policing" is a euphemism for what used to be called
"patrol." Problem is, that we're so busy answering 911 calls all day, there's no
time for patrol anymore.

4. Every officer I worked with admitted that the
war on drugs was useless. When there's a demand, they will be a
supply.

5. Let's all remember that police and fire departments have been
the front lines for all of the social experiments in our country and that has a
lot to do with the poor moral (and behavior) from many officers. When you have
federal judges saying that a police officers height and weight don't matter to
propel a belief that anyone with who means well, can do that job -- well that's
just a fantasy, or rather a nightmare we're all forced to live.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:48AM|#

"You'd think we would have seen something in the news about
that.
"

You mean like today's news account about mortar and rocket
attacks at a 21 month low?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:52AM|#

"...and passing an oil deal?"

No, the war is "about oil". The US has
already taken all the oil. George Bush and Dick Cheney have all of the oil.
There is no oil left in Iraq to deal over.

reply to this

Episiarch|11.12.07 @
9:54AM|#

Can we not threadjack this cop thread into Iraq? Maybe?

Every
officer I worked with admitted that the war on drugs was useless. When there's a
demand, they will be a supply.

So why don't you all quietly refuse
to enforce?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:55AM|#

You mean like today's news account about mortar and rocket attacks at a
21 month low?

Remember when the President spent his State of the
Union Address talking about how the purpose of the surge was to lower mortar and
rocket attacks?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:57AM|#

You mean like today's news account about mortar and rocket attacks at a
21 month low?

Random fact cherry-picking!

Drink!

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 9:58AM|#

"Can we not threadjack this cop thread into Iraq? Maybe?"

I will cease
and desist, as the cops say.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:01AM|#

Steve,

I don't know what type of community you worked in, but I live
in the city that saw the largest drop in crime of any American city during the
1990s. It's also the city where the community policing concept was first dreamed
up and implemented - it was once called the Middlesex Strategy, after Middlesex
County, Massachusetts.

Thanks to the COPS program, the city was able to
expand to the rolls of the police force to the largest count in the city's
history, and those additional police were used mainly for foot patrols through
neighborhoods.

The results have been inarguable. It's not surprising that
your community's decision to use the program just as a budget offset didn't have
an impact on crime, and left you with no more staffing to get ahead of the
"putting our fires" curve, but where it has been used as intended, the results
have been quite different.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:02AM|#

Joe,

I realize that reduced violence in Iraq is not good news for you.
I expect you to continue your mantra of despair until Hillary is the commander
in chief, at which point you probably will celebrate good news, as good
news.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:07AM|#

"Good news from Iraq" would be when the number of U.S. troops and mercenaries
declines from the current 300,000+ to less than 50,000. Excuse me, when is that
going to happen? If our WWII buffs checked their calendars, they might notice
that the defeat of the Axis powers--Germany, Italy, and Japan--took less four
years. After close to five years of the war against the "axis of evil," we're
maybe half way to subdueing one of them.

Oh, and re 100,000 cops on the
streets. No, it didn't do much to reduce crime, but it did wonders to reduce
Democratic vulnerability on the "soft on crime" issue. Sort of like Bush's
prescription drug program, except a lot cheaper. Politics! Ya gotta love it!

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:09AM|#

Yawn.

wayne, I don't think you have any idea how little the yapping of
war supporters about good news in Iraq matters to me.

It's November 2006.
Being told that we've turned the corner in Iraq, AGAIN, by the same people
who've been telling me that for five years concerns me about as much as an email
from a former officeholder in Nigeria who needs to move some money out of the
country.

If you have so certain about the direction of the Iraq War, why
are you so confident Hillary Clinton is going to be the next president, and not
somebody who supports the war?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:11AM|#

"Good news from Iraq" would be when the number of U.S. troops and
mercenaries declines from the current 300,000+ to less than
50,000.

Amen. There is no "good news" until our troops are out of
that shithole.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:14AM|#

NPR made some odd sounds about things turning around somewhat in Iraq this
morning. That may not mean anything, but that's unexpected news from an
unexpected source. They also said that the Iraq war is no longer polling very
high for either party. We are a fickle, fickle people.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:14AM|#

This time, in English.

wayne, if you are so certain that we've turned
the corner in Iraq - this time for real! - then why are you so confident that
the next president will be a Democrat who is running against the war, rather
than a Republic who has supported it all along?

Hey, Rocky, watch me pull
a rabbit out of my hat!

reply to this

Episiarch|11.12.07 @
10:16AM|#

Hey, Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit out of my
hat!

A-gain?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:17AM|#

"Amen. There is no "good news" until our troops are out of that
shithole."

And this kind of progress moves that goal closer.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:17AM|#

If you have so certain about the direction of the Iraq War, why are you
so confident Hillary Clinton is going to be the next president, and not somebody
who supports the war?

Hey Captain Loaded-Question, since when
doesn't Hillary support the war?

reply to this

Syloson of Samos|11.12.07 @
10:17AM|#

Maybe the Reason staff can put up a permanent (rolling?) Iraq thread?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:22AM|#

Taktix,

For the past two years or so. Don't you read the papers, or
the internets, or anything?

reply to this

Rhywun|11.12.07
@ 10:23AM|#

I don't know what NYC did with any "COPS" money, but I'm betting it didn't
put it into foot patrols. In ten years living here I have seen a cop walking
down the street maybe twice (not counting special events which are flooded with
cops just standing around). They bitch and moan all the time about not getting
any respect from "citizens", but would never deign to get out of their cars and
actually mingle with them once in a while.

reply to this

Syloson of Samos|11.12.07 @
10:23AM|#

wayne,

BTW, the best thing for American liberty is for things to go
well enough in Iraq for U.S. soldiers to come home. If the civil war there calms
down enough for that to happen, well, great.

reply to this

The Tide Has Turned! Really!|11.12.07 @ 10:26AM|#

"The President has said that the tide has turned, and he expresses confidence
that we will achieve victory. And of course the President believes that. That's
the whole purpose of our efforts." -- Ari Fleischer, 2003

"We're handing over authority to
a sovereign Iraqi government; we're encouraging more international support for
the Iraqi transition; we're helping the Iraqis take responsibility for their own
security; we're continuing to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure; and we are moving
toward free elections. A turning point will come in less than two weeks." - George W. Bush, 2004

"When it comes to fighting the
threats of our world, when it comes to making America safer, when it comes to
spreading the peace, we're turning a corner, and we're not turning back." -- George W. Bush, 2004

"A new Iraqi government represents
a strategic opportunity for America - and the whole world, for that matter. ...
This is a - we believe this is a turning point for the Iraqi citizens, and it's
a new chapter in our partnership." -- George W. Bush, 2006

"I think - tide turning - see, as I
remember - I was raised in the desert, but tides kind of - it's easy to see a
tide turn - did I say those words?"George W. Bush, 2006

The more things change...

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:35AM|#

"They bitch and moan all the time about not getting any respect from
"citizens", but would never deign to get out of their cars and actually mingle
with them once in a while."

Are you nuts? It's scary out there, with all
those crazy civilians obstructing the sidewalk at two in the morning.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:35AM|#

I can remember being told how delusional I was being for not recognizing how
imminent victory was on Purple Finger Day, too.

Attacks go up, attacks go
down. Deaths go up, deaths go down.

The conditions that might allow for
stability and security in Iraq - the new, dumbed-down definitnion of victory -
require, as President Bush and his mouthpieces told us so many times, a
political breakthrough among Iraqis. There is no military solution, only a
political one.

War supporters at least pretended to recognize this after
the 2005 elections, and agains when describing the purpose of the surge. Now it
appears we're back to where we were after Fallajua and Ramadi - pointing to
short-term reductions in the enemy's ability to operate after a major,
unsustainable military offensive as evidence that the war is being won.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:37AM|#

There are cops walking around all over my city.

Did I mention that it
had the largest decrease in crime of any city in American during the 1990s, was
the birthplace of the Community Policing strategy, and used its COPS money to
put community police into neighborhoods as the program intended?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:39AM|#

joe, It's great that crime is declining in your neck of the woods. I, OTOH,
live in Detroit, MI. So you'll excuse me if I don't share your optimism. Crime
is going up. Fortunately we have a Democtatic mayor, Governor and state house,
so it'll all get fixed shortly. ;-)

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:40AM|#

Oh, and as in Boston - the other city pointed to as a great community
policing success story - the decline in crime coincided with a marked
improvement in communty-police relations.

If you ask the cops, they'll
tell you that that improvement was key to the reduction in crime, as they both
came to know the neighborhoods and the people there much better, allowing them
to better understand how to make them safe; and greatly improved the willingness
of the public to provide information and assistance to the police.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:43AM|#

J sub D,

Community policing can work anywhere. You just need the will
among the politicians and police to make it work.

William Bratton - the
brilliant, professional, community-oriented chief that Rudy Guiliani fired in
favor of Bernie Kerick - is turning the LAPD around, and that's perhaps the most
hostile, occupation-oriented department in the country.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:43AM|#

Oh yeah, population is going in the reverse direction too. Funny how that
works. But the mayor's got 20 officers to protect him and his family. They get
lot's of overtime. Many are his High School buddies. It is hilarious if you
don't live or work here.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:48AM|#

And we're STILL under court ordered federal oversight because we are unable
to fix the department. I'm opposed to privatizing police services, but if you
want to do the experiment, go 1 mile north of Windsor, Ontario. We're getting
desperate here. I read the national stats, and overall the country has been
getting safer for quite some time. Even Detroit is better now than in the '70s.
But I've got to say, it's been discouraging lately.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 10:55AM|#

J Sub D,

Would you say Detroit is finally turning a
corner?

*ducks, runs away*

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:06AM|#

" Even Detroit is better now than in the '70s. "

Eventually, you run
out of abandoned buildings to torch.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:10AM|#

J sub D,

Detroit is a tough case, no question.

If it's any
condolence, my city endured even worse economic decline and population decline,
with the unemployment rate hitting an Iraq-like 30% in the 1980s.

There's
a lot stacked up against Detroit, no question.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:12AM|#

Economics. Better economy, fewer crimes.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:15AM|#

Orlando, FL has proven that you can have more cops, more agencies and
generally more boots on the street, but if they spend their time playing grabass
with strippers and arresting newspaper employees, you'll end up with a high crime rate, especially violent crime.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:15AM|#

I went to Detroit, Rock City, to watch the Bucs and the Lions play (back when
we were both in the Norris Division), and fisticuffs were offered to me solely
because I was wearing a Bucs jersey. We lost, incidentally. That same jersey was
safe in Chicago and in Minneapolis. Did I mention that I had kids with me when
this happened and said not a word to provoke anyone? Lovely town.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:21AM|#

Wait, there are still people in Detroit!?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:26AM|#

Chapman's piece is a great example of lying with statistics.

For
example, Given the multiple shifts, vacation and sick days, the additional
number of personnel on the street at any given moment is only about 10,000,
spread across a nation of 300 million people. That's fewer than one extra cop
per local police department.

Were COPS grants evenly spread across
each of America's police departments? Was the decline in crime caused by
reductions in small towns and surburbs? A better analysis would look at the
number of police added to the departments that received grants, or to the
departments in cities that saw major declines in crime.

As Worrall
and Kovandzic note, the average COPS hiring grant was practically a rounding
error, amounting to about one half of one percent of a typical department's
annual budget. What's a "typical department?" Are we dividing the total
money by the total number of police departments in the country again? Why are we
doing that?

And then there's the difference between a police department's
total budget and its staffing budget. Cruisers, ammunition, and other equipment
are expensive. Retirement benefits of expensive. A better analysis would have
looked at the % increase this represented in the payroll costs of patrolmen in
cities that received money through the program.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:29AM|#

Cesar,

Sure there are. Haven't you ever seen The Crow or
Robocop?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:30AM|#

I, OTOH, live in Detroit, MI.

Is Captain Morgan's Club de
Elegance on Jefferson still open? Great memories.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:32AM|#

That's what you get when you refuse to build a transit system.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 11:59AM|#

Detriot will be safe and wonderful once Hallib....I mean Omni Consumer
Products takes over and creates Robocop.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 12:31PM|#

Sentencing has a much bigger effect on crime rates because cops come after
the fact. It would take an absurd concentration to really affect the crime rate
by stopping them in the act.

Laws such as three strikes, however, do
reduce the criminal population on the streets.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 12:36PM|#

That's old-fashioned thinking - that cops come "after the fact."

It's
been proven wrong by the success of community policing in cities throughout the
country.

reply to this

Paul|11.12.07 @ 12:39PM|#

Hey Captain Loaded-Question, since when doesn't Hillary support the
war?

When she gives a speech at Yearly Kos. Then I suspect that when
she gets in front of the American Legion...

Do try to remember that Hillary is
still a Clinton.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 1:39PM|#

From what I have heard rapid apprehension is one of the biggest deterrents to
crime. Moreso than severity of punishment.

To the extent that community
policing aids rapid apprehension* then it will likely be seen as a success.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 1:57PM|#

Do try to remember that Hillary is still a Clinton.

That
depends on how you define "is". ;-)

reply to this

R C Dean|11.12.07 @
3:20PM|#

Non sequitur of the year nominee:

That's what you get when you
refuse to build a transit system.

WTF?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 3:38PM|#

Detroit, RC. No transit system - ideological aversion to a transit system,
for decades - and now look at it. It's almost as bad as Gary, Indiana. Which
also doesn't have a transit system.

COINCIDENCE?!!?

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 3:40PM|#

Isaac B,

Rapid apprehension is promoted through community policing in
two ways:

the decent people are more cooperative, as they don't see the
police as the enemy, or feel loyalty towards criminals, and

the police
come to know who's who and who's into what, so start out a couple steps
ahead.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 4:03PM|#

Obviously, there can be a positive correlation between criminal apprehensions
and the number of cops on duty in normally high crime areas. But where I live,
in a low-crime area of suburban Philadelphia, some of the local police
departments, which have grown like crabgrass, seem to spend all their time
writing traffic tickets, catching kids for underage drinking, crashing high
school parties in pursuit of the latter activity, holding lockdowns in the local
schools, and generally tormenting the citizens of the township in which they
have jurisdiction. Nobody feels any safer or secure from all this. Quite the
contrary, people feel harassed, threatened, and apprehensive about the
overwhelming police presence in an otherwise pleasant and perfectly safe
environment.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 4:58PM|#

joe

I tend to agree. In fact I was thinking of adding a footnote that
said essentially the same things as you did in your second para (in fact I
neglected to delete the asterisk). Trouble was I couldn't say it with the
brevity you managed.

Until police forces get back to Sir Robert Peel's
Nine Principles there's not much hope. They can call things by all kinds of
fancy names but until the attitudes of cops change nothing will.

I can't
be bothered to provide a link. Those of you who are not familiar with Sir Robert
Peel's Nine Principles, let google be your guide.

reply to this

R C Dean|11.12.07 @
5:55PM|#

It's almost as bad as Gary, Indiana. Which also doesn't have a transit
system.

Not to be confused with D.C., which does have a very nice
transit system.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 6:26PM|#

R C,

I believe that joe was actually joking--this time--but I believe
you just ripped his spine out à la the Predator with that one. Ouch.

The
Metro was a very nice ride when I worked in D.C. (1995). And massively,
massively subsidized, too.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 6:54PM|#

DC in 2007 is a model of redevelopment, with developers flooding in and
turning formerly Detroit-ish blocks and neighborhoods into hip and expensive
yuppie districts. Sorry, RC, the Market hath spoken, and you're 20 years out of
date.

I think this is one of those situations of people who don't know
very much about cities thinking they have a good idea about what they're like
because of what they see on the television.

reply to this

|11.12.07 @ 6:56PM|#

Isaac B,

I've always wanted to ask some of the people who put together
the "Middlesex Strategy" if they were inspired by Peel, because 8 of those 9
could come out of a DoJ Community Policing brochure.

reply to this

Paul|11.13.07 @ 1:33AM|#

is a model of redevelopment, with developers flooding in and turning
formerly Detroit-ish blocks and neighborhoods into hip and expensive yuppie
districts. Sorry, RC, the Market hath spoken, and you're 20 years out of
date.

Hmm, I don't smell the market on this one, I smell government
handouts to developers. Mercenaries, really.

government Official: here's
some money, go kick out the undesirables.

"the market": No problem, but
we might need a little Eminent Domain help, if you get my
drift.

Government Official: You know the people don't like
that.

"The Market": I hear your campaign could use some help. I'm
prepared to donate a significant amount to your campaign. But I say again, we
may need a little eminent domain help.

reply to this

|11.13.07 @ 2:42AM|#

"US military reversing Iraq troop surge "

I know this
means nothing to you state department guys, but to me this looks like
progress...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071113/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/iraq_security_gains

reply to this

|11.13.07 @ 9:51AM|#

"Sorry, RC, the Market hath spoken,"

No, the speculators have
spoken. Last I checked, the market rejected much of the development in the last
5 years.

reply to this

Leave a Comment

* NAME:

EMAIL:
WEBSITE:
Remember name, email, and website on this
computer for 30 days? * COMMENT:

More Articles by Steve Chapman

The
Persecution of John Edwards, Steve Chapman, June 9, 2011

The
Myths About Legalized Gambling, Steve Chapman, June 6, 2011

A War
Fit for a King, Steve Chapman, June 2, 2011

Related Articles (Crime, Barack Obama)

Prison
Math, Veronique de Rugy, June 8, 2011

The
Trouble with ObamaCare, David Harsanyi, June 8, 2011

Wrongful
Convictions, Radley Balko, June 7, 2011

Declare
Defeat and Go Home, A. Barton Hinkle, June 7, 2011

Locked Up,
Locked Out, Bruce Western, June 6, 2011

Latest Articles on Reason Online

The
Cancer of Government Regulation, John Stossel, June 9, 2011

Ron
Paul’s Radical Vision, Brian Doherty, June 9, 2011

The
Persecution of John Edwards, Steve Chapman, June 9, 2011

Reason.tv:
3 Reasons Not to Fund Art with Taxes (& Yes, There's a Weiner
Connection!), June 8, 2011

Prison
Math, Veronique de Rugy, June 8, 2011

The
Trouble with ObamaCare, David Harsanyi, June 8, 2011

More
Central Planning: The Failed Panacea for Health Care Reform, Ronald
Bailey, June 8, 2011

Latest Posts on Hit & Run

"Medicare
spends a fortune each year on procedures that have no proven benefit and
should not be covered.", Peter Suderman, June 9, 2011

In
Order to Comply With Obama's Transparency Pledge, NSA Declassifies a
200-Year-Old Document, Mike Riggs, June 9, 2011

Tennessee
Probably Doesn't Want You Watching Human Centipede II Either,
Peter Suderman, June 9, 2011

Cicada
Ice Cream: Crunchy, Delicious, and Banned, Katherine Mangu-Ward,
June 9, 2011

ICE
Raids Small-Town Colorado Dairy and Locks Up Undocumented Dads in the Name of
National Security, Mike Riggs, June 9, 2011

Ayn
Rand, Herbert Spencer, and ObamaCare, Damon W. Root, June 9, 2011

Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey

Differences on Social
Security Reform (5.27)

Poll Shows Age Gap On
Social Security Reform (5.25)

Even Government Workers
Support a Flat Tax (5.24)

Differences of Opinion
Over Private Sector, Government Worker Benefits (5.24)

Half of Americans Say
Government Workers Get Better Benefits Than Private Sector Workers
(5.24)

Most Popular Stories

Viewed

Commented

Emailed

No
Really: SWAT Team Raids House at 6 AM and Handcuffs Father of Three Young Kids
to Execute a Dept. of Education Search Warrant for Estranged Wife's Defaulted
Student Loans (6.8)

Dept.
of Education SWAT Raid Update: Not for a Student Loan, DoE Says (6.8)

The
Lessons of Weinergate (6.7)

UPDATE:
Weiner admits to it all, says he won't resign! Probably About Time to Say
Goodbye to Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) (6.6)

Declare
Defeat and Go Home (6.7)

No
Really: SWAT Team Raids House at 6 AM and Handcuffs Father of Three Young Kids
to Execute a Dept. of Education Search Warrant for Estranged Wife's Defaulted
Student Loans (6.8)

Federal
Judge: “Taken seriously, Citizens United requires that corporations
and individuals be afforded equal rights to political speech,
unqualified.” (6.8)

Reason
Morning Links: Sandbags, Bitcoins, and "Total War" (6.9)

Miami
Police Shoot Man to Death, Attempt to Steal/Destroy All Video Evidence of
Shooting Man to Death (6.8)

Should
Rep. Weiner Resign? Get the Heave-Ho? Keep Serving His District? Two Views
(6.7)

No
Really: SWAT Team Raids House at 6 AM and Handcuffs Father of Three Young Kids
to Execute a Dept. of Education Search Warrant for Estranged Wife's Defaulted
Student Loans (6.8)

Wrongful
Convictions (6.7)

Dept.
of Education SWAT Raid Update: Not for a Student Loan, DoE Says (6.8)

Prison
Math (6.8)

Locked Up,
Locked Out (6.6)

advertisements

Get Reason E-mail Updates!

First Name
Last Name Email Manage your Reason e-mail list
subscriptions

Site comments/questions:

Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:

(310) 367-6109

Editorial & Production Offices:

3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310)
391-2245

Home|About|Advertise|Privacy|Contact
Copyright 2011, Reason
Magazine